|Page 1 of 9:||        |
|Index||88 reviews in total|
Yeah, like pretty much every other horror movie that hits the theaters, this
one took a pretty heavy trashing both, from the critics and from the
audiences who didn't understand it. However, I found "Bones" to be a highly
enjoyable, entertaining, and (at times) creepy horror flick that I hope, is
the birth of a new franchise. It's very refreshing to see a horror flick
that can take a standard premise and make it seem fresh again. Also, I
enjoyed the killer being a someone who we can sympathize with. Let me break
it down a little bit.
Back in 1979, Jimmy Bones was the man of his neighborhood. Just what all he was into is never fully explained, but we do know that he runs a pretty classy little nightclub and loves to dress in full-pimp get-up. Basically, Bones is a good guy. All he wants to do is run his business and take care of his people. However, when he is propositioned to bring in crack, he refuses and is double-crossed then murdered by people he thought he could trust.
Jump twenty years into the future and we get a group of twenty-somethings who have just bought the building where Bones was murdered. Hoping to turn the place into a club, they ignore all warnings of the place's evil and pretty soon, they mess around and wake the dead. Now that Bones is back, he's upset, understandably, and wants revenge on the people who did him wrong.
That's it. Kinda sounds like Nightmare On Elm Street right? Well, it's a lot like it and a lot of others you may have seen. What set this one apart for me was the lead. Casting Snoop Dog as Jimmy Bones was perfect. I've never been a big fan of his acting, but here, he pulls it off great giving us a villain that we can sympathize with, care about, and root for. We know where he's coming from and watching him take his revenge on the dispicable villains was fun fun fun. I also enjoyed the romantic angle brought to the film by the chemistry between Snoop and Pam Grier. I don't think that it would have gone down near as well had there been a different set of actors, but it gave a real soft side to Bones and made me like him that much more.
I really loved the cinematography and having the blood look intentionally fake, was also a nice touch. Unlike some others, I really enjoyed the shifting in tones. The first 2/3 of the picture had a really dark and gothic tone to it while the latter third had a little bit of comic relief thrown in. Yes, it went WAY over the top (the severed heads, that whole "world of the dead" bit) but, for me, that added to the overall joy of the film and made it that much more. It also made it VERY hard to take it serious. It's pretty hard to find a good horror flick these days (and a mainstream one, at that) and I'm sure that I'll be adding this one to my dvd collection pretty soon. Oh, (I don't think I'm giving too much away here) the door is left open for a whole slew of sequels. I can't wait.
This film starts out promising and carries that promise a fair way into the
movie, but when everything falls into place we are left with illogical
character developments purely so the film-makers can end the movie on time.
The fact that Snoop's character is not a villain, but the script unjustly
makes him one, is probably the worst thing about the movie. However, this
film is still worth the watch for Snoop Dogg's interesting performance and
some actually creepy moments.
This film as a whole is not a success, but for fans of B-grade horror (which admittedly I am), this has some value to it.
With a growing trend of rappers starring in their own movies, Snoop Dogg
joins the pack with 'Bones'. Snoop plays Jimmy Bones, a 70s hustler, who is
betrayed and murdered by some of his closest associates. Since the time of
the murder, Jimmy's corpse is buried in the basement of an abandoned house
in Bones' now seedy neighborhood. When a group of empty-headed teenagers buy
the abandoned house, they unsurprisingly wake up Jimmy's spirit, resulting
in Bones going on a bloody rampage for revenge.
What the heck are we to do with a movie like 'Bones'. Are we supposed to take it seriously as a horror movie. Or laugh at its silliness and Snoop's attempt at becoming a real-life 'Doggfather'. Whatever its intentions are, this movie doesn't have the feel of a horror movie. Rather, it feels more like one of Snoop's pot induced fantasies.
Rating: 5/10 or (2 stars)
Caught this on BET one night. Bones was utterly horrible, but so bad
that it was actually funny. And I must say, that while it is a pathetic
teen-targeted horror film (and directed even further at Black and
probably Hispanic audiences), it was about a zillion times better than
most of the pretty white teen "horror" movies I have seen (Scream, I
Know What You Did Last Summer, Urban Legend, and all of their
nauseating sequels to boot).
This is the story of what I guess was a drug dealer (gee...does Snoop ever do anything different than play a street thug of one sort or another). And his ghost floats around this bizarre, abandoned mansion, that is suddenly claimed by a handful of neighborhood teens who want to turn the pit into a party palace. Bones (Snoop) is terrorizing the people in the house as his ghost floats around in pergatory aiming to take revenge those who stabbed him in a drug deal gone wrong. Why he chose that moment to take his revenge, or why he goes after the teens is unclear. Bone's old woman, played by Pam Grier (a good actress wasted in yet another trashy movie), is psychic and can tell that something bad is brooding in the air.
There was a special effects paradox at work in this film. On the one hand, the production crew goes out of their way with some fantastic, if not innovative, special effects moment (and you need plenty of them with a story so thin as this). And towards the end of the movie, they really take advantage of all of this. On the other hand, for all of the bloodbath scenes, the production crew is very generous with this cheap looking "fake blood," which is nothing more than bright red paint. How stupid. Actually, the whole movie was pretty stupid. But, at least they did try here and there to do something a little different (both in story elements and special effects), although it was still a bad movie. And, at least it was something you can really laugh at whereas the other movies I mentioned can just really make you homicidal, they're so dreadful (in story and special effects).
Ahh... the midnight horror movie. Cheesy, silly, and not in the slighest
bit scary, its sole purpose is to provide a cheap thrill or induce sleep.
As anyone who's read any of my other reviews can see, I like cheap thrills
just as much as a good movie, and although Bones certainly was cheap,
cheesy, silly, and not in the slightest bit scary, I didn't enjoy it as much
as I'd thought I would.
The reasoning for this is that Bones is exactly like any other direct-to-video, midnight cable fare, only at theatrical release, midday pay-per-view pricing. The reason I like other cheap films so much is because they are just that - cheap. I'm biased; I expect a lot more from a movie that I shell out $9 for in a theatre than a $2 5-day rental.
In 1979, Jimmy Bones (Snoop Dogg!) is your friendly neighborhood numbers-runner. A crooked cop, a drug dealer, and his business associate try to convince him to bring crack to the hood. Bones is a numbers-runner with morals and a love for his people, and won't allow it. The business meeting ends with his murder.
In 2001, the neighborhood has gone to hell, especially Bones' old mansion, which is currently haunted by a big black dog with blood-red eyes. A group of teen wanna-be DJ's (who also just happen to be the children of Bones' old associate) decide to fix up the mansion and turn it into a happening nightclub. They discover Bones' skeleton buried in the basement, and a stray dog, whom they name Bones (how original!). This dog just happens to be the same killer incarnation of Jimmy Bones' ghost, and every life he takes adds life to the bones in the basement, until Jimmy is resurrected from the dead, and he sure is angry!
This film, equal parts horror, comedy and blaxploitation, begs you not to take it seriously. If you do, like most films of this type, you'll notice the atrocious acting and cheap special effects. If not, however, you'll be intrigued by bleeding pool tables, talking severed heads, and a climax in the "city of the dead", that is actually well done and far surpasses the rest of the film. Unfortunately, it lacks the campy "charm" of any of the above mentioned three genres.
I knew from the trailers and movie posters not to take this movie seriously. Even taking it as nonseriously as I could, I just couldn't enjoy it; it's a lowbrow wolf of a film trying to pass itself off in theatrical sheep's clothing. Honestly, if I had found this on the back shelf of some cheap video store I would've loved it. In a theatre, I just expect more from films.
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
An attempt to make a modern-dress Gothic melodrama that is just not successful. Ernest Dickerson has a good grasp of the iconography of horror films, but he can't put them together well enough to make a good scary movie. He borrows concepts and images liberally from Clive Barker, Dario Argento, and Mario Bava - but all it shows is that he's a good copycat, not that he's a good stylist. From the idea of evil reviving itself by consuming a victim (Barker's "Hellraiser", but cinematic ally dating at least back to Hammer's "Dracula, Prince of Darkness" from 1965), thru the rain of maggots (Argento's magisterial "Suspiria"), to the disembodied hand reaching out of the darkness to torment the dead man's lover (Bava's masterpiece, "Whip and the Body"), there really is nothing here that we haven't seen before and better. The conceit of setting it in a ghetto with an all-black cast promises an interesting variation on your basic "revenge from beyond the grave" scenario, but beyond the music and fashions it's still a pretty clichéd film. One of the problems is that Dickerson just can't seem to leave well enough alone - like the maggot scene. OK, it's raining maggots and it's terrifying, we get it already, is it really necessary to go for the gross-out by showing people EATING them? Or the scene where Maurice is killed - again, the dog-spirit eats Maurice to give form and substance to Bones' cadaver, we get it, it's not necessary to linger on the details of the chow-down. It's never scary - just disgusting. Even his attempts to inject humor are forced and heavy-handed, with the idiotic scenes of Bones carrying the heads of his victims and having them carry on an interminably pointless conversation. And again, he doesn't show it to us once, there's at least three long scenes with the chatty heads so whatever humor there was is pounded into unconsciousness thru repetition. But the most glaring problem with this movie is that we are asked to sympathize with a character who is, at bottom, just as big a bad guy in life as the crack dealers who murder him. Dickerson tries to show us Bones as the protector of his 'hood, but come on - he's exploiting his people just as much with his numbers game, or did it never occur to anyone to ask how Bones got the money for his supah-dupah fly crib when everyone else around him lives in complete poverty? For a MUCH better horror movie that reflects the black urban experience, rent "Tales from the Hood" instead.
I was doubtful about this movie when I went to the cinema to watch it last weekend, but after having watched it I reinforce my good opinion about the products made by New Line Cinema. The film is very well done but apart from that, I think it shouldn´t disappoint any fan of horror, it has everything that a good movie of the genre must have, including great amounts of blood, a very good rhythm and effective actors such as Pam Grier(Jackie Brown), the muse of blaxploitation genre from the seventies, a genre which is paid homage in this movie as well as some classics of the genre such as "Hellraiser" or "Reanimator", although the introduction of the comic element paying homage to that movie was for me the weakest element of the whole(it broke the so tenebrous atmosphere).Finally, director Ernst. R.Dickerson who also directed the not so good but entertaining "tales from the Crypt: Evil Knight" assured that this movie had elements from Italian horror cinema, I don´t know but perhaps there is one: The warms.A homage to Lucio Fulci?, I know there is many homages here but it is the same for other movies and the cocktail is far from being so effectively combined as here.I don´t think they are going to make a sequel, but I am looking forward eagerly the next movie from this director and I wish "Resident Evil" was so satisfactory.
This movie is not the worst of horror movies that I have seen, however it is far from the best also. This movie has some pretty decent special effects, and doesn't have a bad story line. Who better to play a drug pusher in the 70's than Snoop Dogg. Snoop is not the best actor in the world but does show a better job in this movie than previous movies. 7 out of 10 stars. Not great, but not bad.
I only recently saw this movie. Basically your standard man gets killed
and sometime later comes back to life to get his revenge on his
killers. It starts with potential and kept it through about 3 quarters
of the film but in the last quarter it choked, stalled, and then died.
All through the movie the blood was any color but the color of blood, I have to wonder if that was supposed to have paid homage to the days when the censorship laws prohibited film makers using blood colored blood, it does in its own way add a kind of sick humor to Bones and there was plenty of dark humor to go around in the first place, really there are parts that are quite funny. Unfortunately there are also parts that are just plain stupid and other parts that are gross just for the sake of being gross. It also has plenty of things that are cliché then there is the racially cliché. A black man has a white lover called Snowflake and a joke about eating fried chicken among other things.
Getting closer to the end the story begins to follow an illogical line, if Jimmy Bones returns from the dead to seek revenge on those that killed him then why did he do so much more damage and why did the movie end the way it did? So that the film makers could get the movie done and leave an opening for a sequel to a movie that never needed one?
I think that the greatest injustice of the movie was that the character of Jimmy Bones was made into the bad guy, vicious and ruthless and completely the opposite of what and who the character was made out to be during flashback scenes that occur throughout the film. Even though this happens Snoop Dogg gives a great performance as Jimmy Bones but the writing of the character and the movie itself could have been handled better, both had potential that was dropped and ended before the full potential was ever reached. Still the movie is fun and that makes it very watchable even if you watch it just the once.
I've read the other comment referring to Snoop Doggs'horror film,
Bones....When this first came out it was my favourite horror film but I
watched it that many times that it lost its' lustre.
The effects are great and plenty of blood and some gore from the outset. The beginning sets the tone for the rest of the film as it's one of those films that you just NEED to get to the bottom of why it is happening and what actually took place to cause it. It all unfolds at a pace enough to keep your interest as a viewer. This film is still a very watchable and enjoyable film in my opinion, even today.
It was nice to see Snoop in something different and anyone that is a Snoop Fan will enjoy this film all the more.....7 out of 10.
|Page 1 of 9:||        |
|Newsgroup reviews||External reviews||Parents Guide|
|Plot keywords||Main details||Your user reviews|
|Your vote history|